At least it is not a white woman with blonde hair
Disney is loyal to the source material here but not with the little Mermaid
shareDats cause Little Mermaid is a whitey
share
MovieChat Forums > Mulan (2020) Discussion > At least it is not a white woman with bl...
Newsflash! Mermaids don't exist therefore they can be white, black, Hispanic, Asian or polka dot.
share"Mermaids don't exist therefore they can be white, black, Hispanic, Asian or polka dot."
True, but that particular mermaid was invented by a Danish guy, Hans Christian Andersen, who most likely had Caucasian in mind.
Irrelevant since adaptions are made to suit the audience where the film is going to be seen like changing the language to American English.
shareTo be fair a mermaid is a fictional, mythological being so that leaves more room for creative freedom than with Mulan who is human & based on an actual historical Chinese figure.
shareCan someone please explain to me who decided this? This idea that every fictional character can just be twisted and warped and perverted anyway we choose just because they're fictional? Where does that come from?
This is the same logic that turned the vampire from a bloodsucking creature with fangs that can only be killed by daylight or a stake to the heart, into a glittery sparkle fairy with no fangs and can only be killed by dismemberment.
Absolutley no connection to the folklore of what a vampire is, but because the foundation is folklore and not fact, that means that it's just as canon as lestat? Fuck off. They arent the same creature. And the same thing applies here.
The little mermaid is a fictional story that was based in europe. The author is european. That's all the source material you fucking need to know she's supposed to he white. Dont play stupid. When the ancient vikings created Odin and Loki, you think they imagined them as africans? Or likewise with the Greeks when they created Zeus? The little mermaid is part of european history and european culture. Just because its fictional doesnt give anyone the right to scribble all over it.
It's easy really.
Fictional white character can be changed to anything they want. European ancestory, heritage, folklore and plain history doesn't matter because it is "to white".
Fictional black character cannot be changed because there race and skin colour matter to the character or because people just scream racism.
These are basically the rules now. Evil white man remember.
It's hypocrisy of the highest order.
Let's take an easy one, Blade. His skin colour plays no part on his character, what do you think would happen if it was changed to a white man. There would be hell on, Twitter would implode on itself in all the outrage.
If you say that black to white is racist then you are a hypocrite if you say white to black is not.
I think that perhaps that the reason for that is that in American cinema, roles that were played for minorities were written to be played by minorities. I'm sure that you would see outrage if a POC were to play Lincoln just as much as if an black person played Pocahontas, or a black man played John Smith.
There are roles where race does matter. All races.
There are roles where it doesn't, and a lot of those roles are being diversified. I can't say it's right or wrong, as that is up to the individual to decide with their wallet.
"Can someone please explain to me who decided this? This idea that every fictional character can just be twisted....."
woah , woah there .
Thats not at all what threadkiller said .
The 1837 "source material" is horrific. The mermaid's voice and tongue were removed by the sea witch. The mermaid was given feet which would cause her pain and bleed. The prince marries a princess. The mermaid is told to kill the prince but instead she commits suicide. That's the original story.
Nobody complains about all the changes Disney did to the story. Hire a black actress and all of a sudden you want tradition. Would you really want to see the 1837 version or believe it's appropriate for a young child?
The original theme of both stories (1837 and Disney) is how differences aren't important because a mermaid and human fall in love.
First, the source material is not 'horrific'. Hans Christian Andersen is one the greatest folklore storytellers ever, and the original story is a tough story about the dangers of naivety and unrequited love. Folk tales were often life lessons, and Little Mermaid, the original one, is not an exception.
Second, there were many complains about it. Disney added a happy/romantic endings more than once (it's not just the Little Mermaid), and it was heavily criticized because of it since that took away core elements of the tale.
That said, those changes were not political. They were just happy endings and lots of sugar. To give an example: they didn't make the Sea With a Jew so you could say 'Look, Jews are awful!". That would have been political... and that's EXACTLY what modern Disney does: changes are now politically and racially motivated. Check Star Wars where, with a couple of exceptions, the villains/cucks are systematically white males, and the good guys are mostly non-white/Hispanic males or females.
The Mermaid being tortured with each step, having her tongue removed, being dumped by the prince and committing suicide is horrific and would've traumatized me as a child along with Hansel and Grethel pushing the witch into the oven to be burned alive and the three blind mice having their tails cut-off with a carving knife.
Nevertheless, you're not complaining about any change that Disney made except focusing on race, again.
Equality and fairness offend you. Your problem is your strong sense of entitlement.
Solid logic there Keelai, well said!
shareNot really. Actually, his logic was so flawed that I didn't even bothered in answering.
He was accusing Christian Andersen, one of the most important writers of folktales for kids ever, of 'traumatizing kids'. Sure, Christian Andersen, traumatizing kids, that's why he's a fucking classic for kids. I read all those classic books when I was a kid. Back then, two of my favorite books were the Iliad and the Odyssey. You know how many people die in those two books? In the 'Odyssey', Ulysses takes a wooden stake and stabs the eye of the giant Polyphemus, and eye that was as big as a human head. Quite gore, huh? Thanks we didn't have puritans like you two banning or burning books so I couldn't read them.
And the accusation of 'not complaining about any change except focusing in race' is ridiculous. The other changes are not religious. However, race and gender are the two key elements in the new Woke Religion that has spread throughout Hollywood and those are the changes that are religion-based. Should I complain about other things to have the right to complain about religious proselytizing? Sure. Or better said, fuck off.
[deleted]
[deleted]
it's open season on whites
shareVery few of what we call fairy tales are suitable for children. We’ve simply emasculated them. Red Riding Hood is a werewolf story. Hansel and Gretle is about a cannibalistic witch.
shareSo true. I watched a Hansel and Gretel cartoon when I was a kid and was horrified when the boy pushed the witch into an oven and burnt her to death.
shareKid's stories of those days were pretty horrific in general.
shareTrue that.
shareI know right. I would be angry with Disney changed her appearance to that
shareSo, when all the five-year-old non-Asian girls want princess dresses based on this movie for visits to Disneyland and Halloween, will they be denied because of cultural appropriation?
share